BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 11.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

and

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

W.A.(MD) No.3244 of 2025

Mohamed Thamimul Ansari ... Appellant

-vs-

1.Axelin Thiraviyam

2.The District Registrar Tiruchirappalli District

Tiruchirappalli

3.The Sub-Registrar

Manapparai

Tiruchirappalli District

4.The Tahsildar

Manapparai Taluk

Tiruchirappalli District

5.The Village Administrative Officer

No.21, Sevalur Village

Manapparai Taluk

Tiruchirappalli District

6.The Firka Surveyor

Manapparai Taluk

Tiruchirappalli District

7.Danial Albert

8.S.Padmapriya ... Respondents Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order, dated 24.07.2025, passed in W.P.(MD) No.18680 of 2025, on the file of this Court.

For Appellant : Mr.T.M.Madasamy For Respondents : Mr.Kevin Karan for R1 Mr.K.S.Selva Ganesan Additional Government Pleader for R2 to R6

J U D G M E N T

[Judgment of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.]

When there is a property dispute between the first respondent /

writ petitioner, namely, Axelin Thiraviyam and his brother Daniel Albert / seventh respondent herein in respect of the property devolved upon them by a Will alleged to have been executed by their grandfather, namely Durairaj, dated 31.10.2005, the writ petitioner had created four sale deeds to different persons with regard to Plot Nos.34, 36, 37 and 38 and presented the sale deeds before the Sub Registrar, Manapparai, for registration. The Sub Registrar, Manapparai has rightly refused to register the document and issued refusal slip Nos.RFL/Manaparai/276, 275, 278 & 277/2024 dated

30.07.2024.

2. Challenging the said refusal slips, the writ petitioner filed four writ petitions seeking certiorarified mandamus calling for the records from the Sub Registrar, Manapparai (second respondent in the writ petition), to quash the said refusal check slips as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and consequently to direct the second respondent to register the sale deeds presented by the writ petitioner.

3. The learned Single Judge by way of a common order dated

24.07.2025, held that double entry for the same property is permissible under law; the Sub Registrar or the District Registrar cannot act as a Civil Court and cannot adjudicate the disputes relating to the title; and therefore, if any party is aggrieved, they are at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court, quashed the refusal slips and directed the Sub Registrar to register the sale deeds.

4. The brother of the writ petitioner was arrayed as sixth respondent and one Padmapriya was arrayed as seventh respondent in the writ petition. Pursuant to the order passed by the learned Single Judge, it appears that the Sub Registrar, Manapparai has registered the sale deeds in respect of the four plots.

5. At this juncture, the appellant herein has come before this Court by way of this third party writ appeal after obtaining necessary leave from this Court, against the common order dated 24.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.18680 of 2025.

6. According to the appellant, insofar as Plot No.38 is concerned, which is the subject matter of W.P.(MD) No.18680 of 2025, the seventh respondent herein sold the subject property to one D.Tamilselvi, under a sale deed dated 08.06.2021, registered as document No.2902 of 2021 and one M.Ganesh, under a sale deed dated 19.08.2021, registered as document No. 4667 of 2021 and the said D.Tamilselvi and M.Ganesh jointly sold the subject property to him under a sale deed dated 29.12.2022, registered as document No.9290 of 2022. The said sale deeds were duly registered. The vendor / seventh respondent got the property through a Will executed by John Durairaj. Without impleading the appellant as a necessary party, in whose name Plot No.38 stands, the above writ petition was filed and the order has been obtained behind his back. Hence, the order passed by the learned Single Judge needs to be set aside and the registrat